Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Firon

µTorrent 2.2 released

Recommended Posts

Yes i know but that is what they do they want to approve any change in any new build and i'm sure that there is more then one private tracker out there doing the same thing and there is nothing i can do about it.

But you do need to understand that this things happen and that everytime that you release a new build it should have actuall real changes plus promo changes when neccessery not just promo changes because once you release a new build hundrends of software sites post an update about it and if there is no actuall real changes then it could cause more problems then benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the tracker should stop whitelisting by build number. That's stupid.

This. None of the private trackers I'm on white list by build number. It's all `Yes, 2.2 is cool but not 2.2.1` etc. I would petition your site admins to be a little more flexible and fix their shit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't think they would do it because because they it with all the allowed clients on the site and there is many clients that are not allowed at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the tracker should stop whitelisting by build number. That's stupid.

This. None of the private trackers I'm on white list by build number. It's all `Yes' date=' 2.2 is cool but not 2.2.1` etc. I would petition your site admins to be a little more flexible and fix their shit.[/quote']

Some of the official release µTorrent builds have had bugs that caused problems for trackers or other clients in swarms; for example, some of the officially released µTorrent 2.04 builds were buggy.

So I can understand why some sites blacklist/whitelist clients by build numbers: just because a µTorrent version is officially released, that doesn't mean all the builds of that release are reliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree . The policy not to update a version # on publicly released builds that are being updated - and for ANY reason - is a bad one, and should be avoided.

I can see why it is so - seeing the so many "promo" builds BitTorrent inc wants users to download w/o knowing what's in them, for commercial reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the whole client whitelist by version concept is utterly retarded. If you trust or have approved the client, you should approve every version unless there's a major screwup at some point. Most of the time, betas of trusted clients (leaving crap like BitComet/Lord out) don't create problems to the tracker itself. It's mostly issues on the user end, but the user knew what he was getting himself to anyway.

Unfortunately the net is swarming with morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the QA process for uTorrent sucks. From an external viewpoint it simply doesn't exist, forcing private trackers to whitelist or blacklist by build number. The sites would prefer not to have to do this, but until they can depend on releases being adequately tested before release I don't see much change. I agree with Rafi that a better use of version numbers would be far preferable to the current practice.

Calling the private trackers "stupid", "backward" and so forth is completely non-productive. Fixing the QA process and addressing the concerns will go a lot further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do test builds and have a thorough QA process in place. It's not possible to catch every issue with QAing, no matter how hard you try.

It's not a good excuse to justify a whitelist by build. You just like being in control and pretending to be a nanny for your users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, right..... another example of "customer service"

Not sure I prefer most tracker admins' nazi mentality either. I'm not using software that evidently messes with their tracker (a.k.a. explicitly blacklisted clients with good enough reasons), why do they want to mess with my system by telling me which otherwise safe software I can or cannot use on my system (while offering little or no justification about that)?

The usual stuff is "We don't allow betas". IF a mod or admin cares to answer, it goes something like "we don't trust betas enough, they may mess up". Like a stable version can't mess up because it's called "stable". Of course there are more ridiculous things, like not allowing betas of clients X, Y, Z but implicitly allowing pretty much any alpha or beta version of clients A, B, C, (e.g. by whitelisting the WHOLE Vuze 4.x line) even though the policy of not allowing any betas or alphas unless there's a serious reason for doing so supposedly still applies. Go figure.

I also still remember the "Ban utorrent's new version, it's spyware, it calls home, it's RIAA or whatever" going on on some trackers. The same thing also happened with Vuze. The whole thing of course was/is total nonsense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a customer service rep. I provide support here, but I'm not some random call center support guy. So if you make your opinion public, then I will tell you what I think of it. It's not a personal attack; I just don't agree with the way you operate things.

A blacklist is a much saner way to operate, imo. At least a blacklist for specific versions, even if there is a whitelist for specific clients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case of uTorrent - a "hidden" reason to use blacklists is because you don't publish build numbers many times, so there is nothing to whitelist.... and your promo-releases' users are banned... :P I suggest you just avoid doing that, publish all build numbers and problem solved... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rafi, you should be happy:

-- 2011-02-18: Version 3.0 (build 24767)

- Feature: make the content offer in the installer dynamic (no more re-builds for updating content offer)

I guess it's the best way to offer promo: no build, just a dynamical 'promo store'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am , I am . Probably cause of my bitching about it for the last three years ... :P

:D:);):P:lol:

Let me just ask this: I never use the installer (just replacing the EXE). What happens then ?

And if not putting it in 2.2.1 means - no more promos in 2.2.x line - even better... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange Logic Bug... I have Limit Local peer bandwidth UNCHECKED, but I have GLOBAL Max Upload bandwidth limited to 30kB....

Local transfers are in the 80MB/s range, so it's OK.... BUT all WAN download transfers drop to exactly 50kB/s total after an hour or so. As soon as I stop the local transfer & restart utorrent, everything goes back to normal and WAN transfers are back to 1500kB/s down & upload rates are at 30kB/s up.

Has anyone else encountered such strange behavior..?

I tried not limiting global upload rates & that was a temporary fix until I finished the local transfer... I have slow upload bandwidth, so I must limit it. Limiting them individually also works, but global limits are BROKEN when local peer transfers are in use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Firon, what can I do to help you figure why and then fix an issue I've been having? Basically whenever I do anything related to apps (excluding uninstalling them, hilariously enough) utorrent crashes. If I `add` a torrent inside one, if I add an app to utorrent, etc.

build: 2.2 - 24683

OS: win7x64

...Actually I just found all the crash dumps. This most recent crash doesn't seem to have produced a dump though. These are all from previous crashes when I was attempting to get utorrent to add the sick of sarah app and then download the promo torrent. So: What to do? Want them all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A blacklist is a much saner way to operate, imo. At least a blacklist for specific versions, even if there is a whitelist for specific clients.

Hey we actually agree on something.... :D

It takes a bit more work, but the sites that do this are much easier to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Firon, what can I do to help you figure why and then fix an issue I've been having? Basically whenever I do anything related to apps (excluding uninstalling them, hilariously enough) utorrent crashes. If I `add` a torrent inside one, if I add an app to utorrent, etc.

build: 2.2 - 24683

OS: win7x64

...Actually I just found all the crash dumps. This most recent crash doesn't seem to have produced a dump though. These are all from previous crashes when I was attempting to get utorrent to add the sick of sarah app and then download the promo torrent. So: What to do? Want them all?

Have you tested 2.2.1?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you tested 2.2.1?

Nope' date=' 2.2.1 isn't allowed on any of the sites I'm on due to being beta.[/quote']

It /seems/ to work on my laptop, but that's not the computer it's crashing on. I'll report the bugs if they're still present when 2.2.1 comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.